IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH

HIGH COURT DIVISION

(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

WRIT PETITION NO.2396 OF 2005

IN THE MATTER OF:

An application under section 102 of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh

-AND-

IN THE MATTER OF:

Mrs. Aleya Begum, wife of Farid Ahamed of Village: Chakpara, P.S. and District: Netrokona

-----------------Petitioner. -Versus-

Artha Rin Adalat No.1, Netrokona and another.

---------------Respondents.

No one appeared for --------------both sides.

Judgment on: 17.05.2023

Present:

Mr. Justice K.M. Kamrul Kader.

And

Mr. Justice Mohammad Showkat Ali Chowdhury.

Mohammad Showkat Ali Chowdhury, J: This Rule Nisi under adjudicationat the instance of the petitionerunder Article 102 of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh was issued on 23.04.2005 in the following terms:

“Let a Rule Nisi be issued calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why the impugned order dated 01.09.2004 passed by the respondent No.1 (Annexure-F) canceling the order dated28.07.2004 by which the petitioner was allowed to pay the loan money along with interest in 8 installments should not be declared to have been made without lawful authority and is of no legal effect and as to why the order dated- 12.04.2005 passed by the respondent No.1(Annexure-J) issuing an warrant of arrest against the petitioner should not be declared to have been made without lawful authority and is of no legal effect and/or pass such other or further order or orders as to this court may deem fit and proper.”

2. The averments made in the writ petition leading to the Rule

which are relevant for disposal of the Rule shall be focused. The petitioner took loan of Tk. 6, 74,924/- (Six lakh seventy four thousand nine hundred& twenty four taka) from the respondent No.2 (Manager, Sonali Bank, Netrokona Branch, Netrokona) on 30.11.1999 and since the petitioner failed to repay the loan money along with interest within the specific period the respondent No. 2 as plaintiff under Artha Rin Adalat Ain, 2003 (in short the Ain, 2003) filed Artha Rin Case No.22 of 1999 before respondent No.1 (Artha Rin Adalat No.1, Netrokona)and the said suit was decreed on ex-parte dated- 31.05.2000. The petitioner in compliance with the said decree did not pay loan money along with interest, the respondent No. 2 filed Artha Rin Execution Case No.6 of 2000 but in respect to the aforesaid execution case the petitioner did not take any step to pay the loan money including the interest as per decree.On 28.07.2004 the petitioner filed an application before the respondents No.1 stating that her business has been affected by flood, it is necessary to give her opportunity to pay the same on 8 installments each of quarterly payable. The Respondent No.1 by its order No.45 dated- 28.07.2004 allowed the petitioner to pay loan money including the interest in 8 installments each of quarterly payable.As per the earlier order passed by the respondent No.1, the petitioner paid Tk.50,000/-(fifty thousand) and filed an application on 01.09.2004 with a receipt of payment of Tk. 18,000/- praying for one month time to deposit the remaining taka of the 1st installment.The respondent No.1 after hearing the parties rejected the said prayer by order dated 01.09.2004 holding that the petitioner violated the order dated 28.07.2004,as such;said order is deemed to be summarily cancelled and directed the petitioner to pay all the money at a time otherwise necessary order will be passed to that effect. It is also stated in the petition that the petitioner deposited the money of the 1stinstallment but the respondent No.1 by its order dated10.3.2005 fixed on 12.04.2004 for holding auction but no auction was held on that date.

3. It has been nextstatedin the supplementary affidavit dated

23.04.2005 that the learned Executing Court by its order dated 12.04.2005 rejected the prayer of the petitioner and has passed an order to issue a warrant of arrest against the petitioner fixing 30.04.20